Women in combat

Share

Subscribe

The head of the Alabama National Guard says those who are troubled by the prospect of female U.S. troops in combat should see how it has worked for one of America’s staunchest allies.

“Look at Israel,” Maj. Gen. Perry Smith said in an interview after an Associated Press report that the Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was “removing the ban on women in combat.”

“They don’t have any restrictions on women serving in the military over there. I mean, everybody’s a soldier. That’s the way I look at it.”

Smith then cited some females who hold important posts in the Alabama Army and Air Guard ranks: a two-star general — “and she’s as good as they get” — the commander of an explosive ordnance disposal unit, and an F-16 pilot who is not restricted in the missions she can fly.

Smith said many women who have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan have seen combat anyway, even if they were not in front line units, because of the front lines in those war zones do not follow traditional lines any more.

“Now there’s no rear, you’re just as susceptible to being shot at or getting an IED as anywhere,” he said. “From my perspective, you know, the women have certainly stepped up to the plate if attacked. They’re part of it, and I don’t see any complaints about women serving in Israel and buddy, they depend on the women soldiers over there.”

To those who might say women aren’t physically strong enough to serve in a front-line combat unit, Smith said women will have to meet physical fitness tests but are not any more likely than their male counterparts to do hand-to-hand combat. Because of the weaponry available to troops today, such combat is not commonplace, Smith said.

“We need patriots and there are women that want to serve and…I don’t see a problem with it, quite frankly,” Smith said.

Lt. Col. Tonya Rogers, a 23-year Guard veteran from Oneonta, said the Panetta decision to remove the combat ban for women will “open up a little bit more equal opportunity” for women in the military, but “there are going to be some challenges with this, and it won’t be an overnight change.”

“It’s going to take a while to get the challenges worked out,” said Rogers, who is commander of the 1200th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion. But, echoing Smith, she said, “We’ve had women in combat.”

According to the Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs, 133 soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines with Alabama ties have died in the War on Terror since the 9/11 attacks. A handful have been women. Two were killed in the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon.

The Alabama National Guard has more than 13,000 troops, more than 11,000 in the Army Guard and more than 2,000 in the Air Guard. Fifteen percent of the Army Guard soldiers are female, and 19 percent of the Air Guard members are women.

I think that it is just an EGO thing....when they can compete in NBA, NFL, NCAA MEN. then I will stop considering them a liability...not to mention men's chilvary becoming a factor when giving orders, or being under fire...

The current DOD decision is to "allow" women in combat, not require it of them, though as it happens, many women have--voluntarily--already been de facto serving in combat: "Of the approximately 280,000 females who have been deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan in the past 12 years, 152 have died and at least 800 have been wounded." I think it is unlikely that women will be added to the Selective Service rolls any time soon, but if they are, it is also doubtful that combat roles will be required of them. Calm down, people... http://www.ibtimes.com/women-combat-now-its-official-they-were-already-fighting-1040702

Btw, the Israeli military forces (since 1948!) have required that women serve in the military. Today 92% of positions are open to women, and many serve in combat. Perhaps conservative Evangelicals who are so supportive of the Israeli state might be asked to explain their caveats regarding U.S. forces... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_Israel_Defense_Forces

Greg, the women who died were in combat support roles, although sometimes, in the kind of guerrilla wars we've been engaged in, they had to take up arms. The new ruling allows them to volunteer for actual combat training and assignments, which means better access to career movement upward.

Yes. The nature of war, at least in the Middle East, has changed. There is much less of a distinction between combat zones and non-combat zones. Just about anybody can get shot at or blown up anywhere... I fully support women's right to choose combat if they so desire (and can meet the physical demands); I do not think women should be forced into combat, or even into the armed forces in general. And I don't think we ought to model ourselves on the state of Israel, but it's useful as a comparison in the debate.